Harry Truman, during his time in the White House, was a considered a poor president. The conventional wisdom of the 1950s viewed him as potentially one of the worst in American history. He was dumb and bad then, but today President Truman is correctly remembered as one of the country’s best chief executives. Truman did nothing to affect this change, passed no new legislation, gave no fresh speeches or military orders. Merely, a lot of people realized a lot of other people were wrong.

It was quite the turnaround.

Star-divide

Certainly, none of that relates in any way to Jim O’Brien’s performance as Pacers head coach, but it is just one of many, many examples in American history, in human history, in universal history, or whatever kind of history you choose, sports history even, of conventional wisdom being wrong.

Want a basketball example? Doc Rivers. Loathed, hated, mocked by Celtics fans, until he took their team to two NBA Finals. Rivers was a dolt, but a coach learns quite a bit, apparently, once Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen dress in his locker room.

The popular sentiment among Indiana fans is to condemn O’Brien, fired Sunday in his fourth season here. In the interests of keeping this column clean, I won’t cull some of the more hateful rhetoric toward our team’s coach, for which the worst offenders should hang their head in shame. He was still the Pacers’ coach, after all.

But I will personalize these remarks somewhat. I like Jim O’Brien. This is fairly well-known. I’m one of the few Pacers fans who refuses to toe the line like a good little sheep and rage against the foibles of "JOB." Quite often, I get categorized as a Jim O’Brien defender, and that’s fine.

I wouldn’t have fired O’Brien today, or at any point this season, and perhaps not even in April, depending on what we saw from our team in the second half of the season.

The lessons of the Indianapolis Colts’ success are many, but the least of them is hardly continuity and stability. When it comes to coaching, especially, I believe many in professional sports are fired too quickly. As soon as a team struggles, boom, talk radio is on the coach’s job status like syrup on a pancake.

That doesn’t mean stability for stability’s sake with an unproven leader or system. But try as they might, no anti-O’Brien fan can make a compelling case that O’Brien or his system never succeeded.

O’Brien knows how to take a team to the playoffs in the Eastern Conference. Did it twice, in Boston and in Philadelphia. That track record accounted for a large part of my faith in him to do the same in Indiana.

His offensive system, of spacing the court with shooters and using the 3-point shot to open lanes for driving and cutting, works with the right players, and the front office did a decent job tailoring the roster to O’Brien’s pretty-decent concepts. Two years ago, Indiana ranked fifth in the NBA in scoring.

In hindsight, that 2008-’09 season is even more remarkable given that the Pacers didn’t have a Kobe Bryant or Steve Nash, the sort of coach’s-dream facilitator enjoyed by some of the other Top-5 offensive units.

O’Brien’s best four players that year, in terms of the offense, were Danny Granger (his excellent breakout season), Mike Dunleavy, T.J. Ford, and Troy Murphy. One of those guys (Dunleavy) played in only 18 games. Two of them (Ford and Murphy) are held in contempt by some of the same folks who despise O’Brien.

So how on God’s green earth did a team relying heavily upon Marquis Daniels, Jarrett Jack, Stephen Graham, the original deer-in-the-headlights versions of Rush/Hibbert, and Rasho Freaking Nesterovic manufacture one of the NBA’s best offenses?

Given that Daniels, Jack, Graham, and Nesterovic have played only minor roles in other cities after leaving Indianapolis, a rational train of thought might credit O’Brien’s system. But I forgot the part where suggesting competency on the part of O’Brien amounts to treason.

Look, joking aside, of course the man had faults. Few coaches don’t. But accurately pointing out mistakes and weaknesses doesn’t poison the entirety of a coach’s performance.

Fans who represent my beliefs honestly know I’m not an O’Brien apologist (if one accepts the premise that an apology is owed). This hasn’t been O’Brien’s best season in Indiana. I’ll gladly point out the problems, if you’d like.

Obie badly mishandled the power forward position, causing the team to play four-on-five offensively early on with Josh McRoberts, who owns no discernible offensive skill other than dunking ability, and had not done anything in his NBA career to suggest use as a starter. O’Brien played James Posey at the four, despite the veteran’s size and age disadvantages and the fact that other coaches had used Posey exclusively at small forward. Posey had a 3-point shot, which O’Brien liked, but running Posey out there on the 10 percent chance he’d have a game like the Hornets game (Dec. 20, 15 points) didn’t make up for the rest of the nights in which JP was essentially useless. It took O’Brien a ridiculous 32 games to realize Tyler Hansbrough was the best power forward on the roster (as I enjoyed Bird quietly alluding to in yesterday’s press conference).

O’Brien couldn’t settle on a nine-man rotation, which good teams win with. True, O’Brien never had a good team, and most of the so-called rotation issues were driven by the constant string of injuries the past two years, but it certainly was bothersome this season, as I pointed out several times on my Twitter account. Hansbrough’s in, Hansbrough’s out, Jones is in, Jones is out, Foster’s out, Foster’s in, George is in, George is out, and so on.

In Milwaukee, on a last-second play in which the Bucks’ only chance was to get a tip-in, O’Brien used the 7’2 Hibbert to guard the inbounder, rather than the basket. Didn’t like it.

Against San Antonio at home, Posey finally sat for 48 minutes, then with under a second to play, removed his warm-up and took the most important shot of the game ice-cold. Didn’t like it.

In Golden State, on Monta Ellis’ game winning shot, Rush got isolated on Ellis, even though Rush is better defending bigger players and got his ankles broken by a quick crossover that Ford or Collison might’ve contained. Didn’t like it.

The offense, for whatever reason, endured a lot of winnable games shooting under 40 percent. Didn’t like it.

But guess what? Evaluating a coach is tough. Players give us a bunch of statistics. A coach’s performance, other than wins and losses, is subjective, and even wins and losses are contained by high-and-low-end possibilities. For example, O’Brien wasn’t winning 55 games in Indiana. Gregg Popovich or Jerry Sloan wouldn’t have won 55 games in Indiana, either, with O’Brien’s rosters.

So just spouting off 121-169 (Obie’s overall record here) doesn’t do a whole lot. (O’Brien was 182-158 outside of Indy, for those wondering.) Bird said it himself yesterday: "Just because he’s the head coach doesn’t mean he’s the reason we’ve lost all these games."

What’s more, that Indiana record doesn’t come with the injury asterisk that it should. Followers of the Pacers on a game-by-game basis under O’Brien know this is the first healthy team he’s had in three years.

Don’t take my word. When the aforementioned Rivers came through Indianapolis this season, he made a telling remark about our coaching staff: "They’ve had a three-year stretch where you can’t have as many injuries as they’ve had, so [O’Brien] has a chance to actually coach his team for the first time in awhile."

And that’s correct. Even in 2007-’08, O’Brien’s first year, his point guard (Jamaal Tinsley) and best player (Jermaine O’Neal) combined to play in only 70 of a possible 162 games (less than 50 percent). The issues of Dunleavy’s knee and Granger’s foot the next two seasons, among many other ailments, are of such recent importance that they don’t need to be rehashed.

Okay, says the irritated O’Brien basher, what about this year? He had his players in uniform, not in suits. Clearly 17-27 is a bad record. To which an O’Brien defender says: Well, bad teams have bad records.

Coaches, as Pacers analyst Tim Donahue astutely pointed out the other day, are assigned far too much influence by fans. This is a player’s league.

Listening to Frank Vogel try to convince himself otherwise was one of the few comedic highlights yesterday.

"We’ve got a good basketball team," Vogel said. "I’m taking over a good basketball team. I fully expect us to make the playoffs this year. I believe this is a good basketball team."

With all due respect to Coach Vogel (who I hope succeeds early and often, by the way), the standard for use of the word ‘good’ needs to be lowered.

Healthy and good teams don’t end up 17-27.

And that sums up the Jim O’Brien era, in my eyes. He never had a good team, and he had one healthy team, whose season O’Brien didn’t even get to coach to its completion.

That’s a fair chance only in this insane, fire-so-and-so.net age, where fans who couldn’t coach a team if they received Vince Lombardi’s implanted brain decide on an impulse that the guys running their team are idiots and ask for termination.

Had the players quit on O’Brien, as they did Rick Carlisle, I would support the firing, as I did Carlisle’s. But I don’t think our guys ever stopped playing hard.

ESPN’s John Hollinger has a lot of credibility. He talks to scouts and general managers and all sorts of basketball minds. His job is to analyze the NBA.

Hollinger said last week that O’Brien is the "least of [Indy’s] problems."

The view outside of this fan base is, as the Miami Herald reported, that O’Brien is a "respected coach." Bill Simmons, author of The Book of Basketball and famous Celtics fan, has written that Obie is "an underrated coach who worked a borderline miracle with the '02 and '03 Celtics."

I agree with them. I think O’Brien’s a smart guy who knows basketball and deserved better. A better fate. Better players. And, of course, better treatment from fans.

Unfortunately, that means I don’t get to celebrate like so many other Pacer people at news of his demise. You seem to be having fun. My advice: enjoy it while it lasts, because the smart bet is we’re about to find out O’Brien wasn’t the problem.

I said there were a few funny moments at Conseco Sunday. Other than Vogel’s overly-optimistic evaluation, there was the fact that Frank has had but one boss as a coach in the NBA. One boss in Boston, Philadelphia, and Indiana. Jim O’Brien.

"He’s been a mentor to me in every sense of the word, and I wouldn’t be here without him," Vogel said.

The irony of O’Brien-bashers celebrating the promotion of an O’Brien loyalist is almost too much. After all, it’s not like Vogel learned just about everything he knows about the NBA from the awful, bad, terrible O’Brien. Maybe there won’t be much change, after all!

From a standpoint of spacing the court…

At any rate, I appreciate those who read this with an open mind to try to understand my rather lonely point-of-view. I wish Jim well and thank him for working hard to try to win. If nothing else, we ought to be able to agree on that much.

some good points made by the author

Kegboy

01-31-2011, 07:11 PM

I got to here:

O’Brien knows how to take a team to the playoffs in the Eastern Conference.

Welp, from what we've heard from his meeting with Larry, he didn't know how to get this team to the playoffs. And that's all that matters.

[edit] I scanned the rest of the article and found this gem:

ESPN’s John Hollinger has a lot of credibility.

Yeah, um, not to be impolite to the author, but this isn't worth my time. I'm gonna go back to watch the rain freezing.

CableKC

01-31-2011, 07:16 PM

Many PD posters have been saying the same thing....JO'B maybe "part" of the problem...but the overall lack of talent on the roster is the other "part" of the problem that shares equal blame for our current situation.

I've said it before....we're a mediocre Team that is capable of under-achieving ( after December ) or over-achieving ( before December )...how we do would be based purely on what the Coach does.

spazzxb

01-31-2011, 11:09 PM

That was to long for me. Who was the author?

PacersHomer

01-31-2011, 11:10 PM

tl;dr. O'Brien is old news.

Merz

01-31-2011, 11:19 PM

These same Celtic fans who thought Rivers was a "dolt" apparently love Jim O'Brien.

So maybe it's just the Celtic fans who are wrong. :D

Naptown_Seth

01-31-2011, 11:25 PM

Irrelevent

That pretty much sums it up. Pick at any one point and maybe the case sounds okay, but this was a culmination of a lot of things that really just need to be said or done. There is no way any of the vets over youth choices were right, simply because the teams didn't win anyway and you could have at least gained some experience, player interaction comfort, and confidence. None of the stuff to the press which included not only the "irrelevant" comment on a nice outing by Josh, but also the MIP discussion on Roy this year and the "AJ showed us he was good enough to play and now that we've seen that it makes sense to put him back on DNP".

You can 3 ball and struggle on with less talent, but let that fall on them. Let them play poorly and get ripped, let them play AT ALL and it turns the finger from you to them. You can say to fans "I'm doing what I can, but you've seen these guys, there young and raw and maybe not ready to win seriously at the NBA level...all I can do is keep trying to coach them up because that's what I'm here for."

JOB's job was EASY, or should have been. We all knew any coach was 100% F'd when it comes to W-L the first 2 years. Fans just wanted to not have criminal issues and whiners on the team anymore, that's all. JOB and Larry took care of that with almost no effort, it was one of the first things they'd resolved by the summer before season 2.

From then on fans were locked into the idea of the long climb out with systematic player development full of the pains of growth and learning. All he had to do was do that, all he had to do was coach up some kids and let them/force them to work during NBA games so they'd develop. He didn't have to beat the Celtics or Lebron or the Lakers or even the Hawks. No one said "Dang, I thought this was a solid 4th seed team and he couldn't get them to win."

If the coach was fired because of the W-L record that was the wrong reasons. It was how he handled every other item besides that. The W-L was the free pass.

kester99

01-31-2011, 11:35 PM

Nobody has ever said we had a Lakers or Heat line-up here. It will be...it always has been...a young developing team with a few competent vets, with two fairly unambitious goals: continue to develop a young core, and make the playoffs. (It's the East, so that's not that ambitious.)

I don't know if I buy the reports of JOB's supposed negative assesment of our playoff prospects (in his last interview with Bird), but it's been more and more obvious over the last few weeks that O'Brien's quirky rotations and near total lack of in-game intuition were factors (at some level) in our decline. I agree; a coach's influence is often overestimated. But the Pacers' playoff chances are a borderline proposition...we either end up just out of the playoffs, or just in. A few percentage points, two or three wins, are going to make a difference, looks like.

We're not going to overhaul our offense to a dramatically different system. It's the middle of the season, and as the author points out, Vogel is an O'Brien man. But I like our chances with an O'Brien disciple who may actually be able to see and react to what is going on in front of him more quickly than his mentor.

Naptown_Seth

01-31-2011, 11:36 PM

Kegboy, it gets even worse IMO because of this one..
Had the players quit on O’Brien, as they did Rick Carlisle, I would support the firing, as I did Carlisle’s. But I don’t think our guys ever stopped playing hard.
So this guy supported firing Rick because JO, Tins, Harrison, Harrington....and who else, quit on him. Talk about backing the wrong horse.

No one thought Danny quit on him, Jackson loved the dude and that's been proven by examples many times over, and Dun/Troy just freaking got here.

What players quit on Rick but were reached by JOB, were turned around by JOB. What players did JOB get to play that Rick couldn't reach? Again, Dun and Troy at mid-season can't quit on a coach they just met with almost no practices even.

Anyone who says "I supported firing a guy who surprised the league TWICE by taking teams well beyond expectations and each to an ECF because Tinsley, JO, Harrington and Ron didn't love him" is a nitwit, there's just no two ways about that. Those dudes, right down the line, are coach killers. None have gone on to save the NBA world or prove much worth beyond a team role filler or empty stat loader (Al). Ron had to freaking salvage his horrible season with a couple of playoff miracles in order to regain some kind of respect as a player.

I'd rather have the coach that took Ron to the all-star game and got him a DPOY award and took a disaster to round 2 and has Dirk ripping through one of his finest seasons along with a list of "didn't you used to be great" players.

Sheesh. It would be different if Rick had been terrible before or was bombing in Dallas. Winning 50 games with 3 different teams in 10 years is how you go on to be Larry Brown, Lenny Wilkins, Sloan, Jackson, etc.

Day-V

01-31-2011, 11:37 PM

lol, Pacers_Chants.

peasouptexan7

01-31-2011, 11:57 PM

I gave O'Brien chance after chance to win me over, but as this season continued I had absolutely no hope that he was the right guy for the team. Yes there were injuries, but when the players tune you out, you obviously aren't the right guy anymore. Hearing some of the players' comments during the postgame (George and Hansbrough specifically) made me think they weren't too sad to see him go. He would not make good adjustments on the fly and took out players in the wrong situations. Yes, it's not all O'Brien's fault, but not having him here gives us a better chance to win than with him here. While I don't wish anyone to lose their job, he had to go. If you think he should've stayed, I'm sorry, but you don't know basketball.

Merz

02-01-2011, 12:05 AM

I think there is a huge difference between "being good little sheep", as the author says, and having eyes.

Some may have formed "their" opinions by going by whats popular, but I'm sure many of the people who disliked his coaching made that decision on there own. It takes just as little thought to blame things on people being "sheep" as it does to be a sheep.

O'Braindead

02-01-2011, 12:09 AM

I thoroughly read the piece, and I am dismissing it as nonsense.

Brad8888

02-01-2011, 07:39 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how a well written and well intentioned author as Cornrows who can express complex thoughts in a coherent fashion can look at what has gone on with the Pacers and the undeniable dissatisfaction that has been expressed by the fanbase and then simultaneously belittle the viewpoints of the clear majority of fans, both casual and rabid alike, while primarily defending himself and another colleague (yes, count55 was an O'Brien supporter in my opinion despite occasionally saying that O'Brien might end up losing his "utility") even more than O'Brien himself.

But, obviously, he has every right to his opinion, and we have the right to agree or disagree with it as we see fit and express ourselves accordingly, and choose whether or not to read his musings.

I look forward to reading actual basketball opinions from Indy Cornrows in the future. This was not his best work. Also, hopefully, with the O'Brien negativity dying down, count55 will come back around here to add a divergent, statistics based viewpoint back into the mix here in an environment where statistics will not produce as skewed a result as they did under O'Brien.

El Pacero

02-01-2011, 07:50 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how a well written and well intentioned author as Cornrows ...

FYI, Pacers_Chants on twitter wrote this novella.

Shade

02-01-2011, 08:05 PM

...

I thought this thread was going to be about Unclebuck. :kickcan:

90'sNBARocked

02-01-2011, 08:07 PM

yeah Cornrows posted it, he didnt write it

He did say he thought it was a great article though

Young

02-01-2011, 08:08 PM

I cannot bare to think how O'Brien would have done if he coached the teams Rick did here. Anyone who wants to suggest that O'Brien is a better coach than Rick, for any reason, doesn't watch a Jim O'Brien coached team or a Rick Carlise coached team. It's night and day different.

Look O'Brien is an average coach. If you give him players that fit his "system" they can get to the playoffs and all that. However being a system coach he was the worst possible coach for this team the past 2 1/2 years.

Jim was fired because he was an underachiever especially with this years team. Plus he wasn't consistent with his messages in the media I can't even imagine what it was like for the players on this team to play here the past couple of years.

Brad8888

02-01-2011, 08:11 PM

FYI, Pacers_Chants on twitter wrote this novella.

Sorry. Thanks for pointing out my oversight.

I clicked the link and went to the site and didn't realize that it was under the fan posts section. I stand (actually sit) corrected.

El Pacero

02-01-2011, 08:27 PM

Sorry. Thanks for pointing out my oversight.

No apologies necessary bro. I was just pointing out it wasn't Cornrows so he wouldn't get blasted, although Cornrows did like it.

The author really likes Tyler, so I wonder if this novella would change based on the comments from "Free Tyler" today. He is also still in love with Troy Murphy, and I still like the guy despite this.

Anthem

02-01-2011, 08:53 PM

Obie handled the PF position poorly... By playing Josh there. What was our record then again?

Ok article, not great.

BringJackBack

02-01-2011, 09:14 PM

Obie handled the PF position poorly... By playing Josh there. What was our record then again?

Ok article, not great.

Hey, wake up!! (In reference to your sig). :D

pacer4ever

02-01-2011, 09:38 PM

Obie handled the PF position poorly... By playing Josh there. What was our record then again?

Ok article, not great.

the author is a Murphy fan LOL he thinks we are worse off cause we dont have Murphy:laugh:

BlueNGold

02-01-2011, 09:51 PM

First, conventional wisdom is conventional because it's usually correct. Popular sentiment is popular because it's usually correct. This article is a lot like Jim and people who attempt to use a few stats to explain the world. They are smart people who have no common sense and their conclusions are pure foolishness.

Second, Truman and even Doc Rivers have nothing to do with the fact Jim had nearly 4 years to improve the record but it kept getting worse. It also doesn't excuse the overly critical statements about his players which the front office rightly called him on.

BTW, I also like Jim O'Brien and the author needs to stop focusing on the fringe. The fact people want him fired badly doesn't mean we hate the man. We just think his performance has taken this team nowhere in the last couple years and there's solid proof he's lost this team, upset players and upset management. Enough!
The fact the author wouldn't have fired Jim means the author doesn't want to see as many wins this season. If anything, the team has clearly gotten a breath of fresh air and a new attitude to finish the season. They may not tear it up the rest of the way, but only a Jim homer would think we are better off this year with him at the helm.

Fired too quickly? "As soon as the team starts struggling" This is pure foolishness. It's been nearly 4 years and the man's record was even worse than last year which was worse than the previous year....all with supposedly more talent.

"The front office tailored the roster to Jim's system". Are you kidding me? Hibbert is not built for this system. Josh and Tyler are NOT 3 point shooting bigs. Collison is a pick and roll PG. I suppose Granger's been turned into a chucker. More great moves.

"TJ and Murphy held in contempt" Ask Jersey dude. 34 minutes of Troy is 34 more minutes than he's getting now, which is about right.

"NBA's best offenses"? Why no playoffs then? Any team can score points with playground ball chucking. I suppose they did get more practice at chucking than other teams...but that didn't translate to much success. Besides the last two years have been horrific and more than enough time to make this call.

...and listening to Frank Vogel was a breath of fresh air. Don't ridicule the man. He's trying to be positive and has a big job on his hands. A big clean-up job.
Sure, Jim did ok the first couple years but don't get carried away. He forced a chuck ball system on a team that was not designed like his beloved Boston Celtics with an athletic C in Tony Battie and a perimeter shooter like is buddy Walter McCarty at the 4. That's a big reason his system never worked here and any child should be able to see that. He has been bad in more ways than one the last couple years and has mismanaged this team on the court and to the press...and that's why he's gone.

Good riddance Jim and welcome coach Vogel!

BlueNGold

02-01-2011, 09:58 PM

I cannot bare to think how O'Brien would have done if he coached the teams Rick did here. Anyone who wants to suggest that O'Brien is a better coach than Rick, for any reason, doesn't watch a Jim O'Brien coached team or a Rick Carlise coached team. It's night and day different.

Look O'Brien is an average coach. If you give him players that fit his "system" they can get to the playoffs and all that. However being a system coach he was the worst possible coach for this team the past 2 1/2 years.

Jim was fired because he was an underachiever especially with this years team. Plus he wasn't consistent with his messages in the media I can't even imagine what it was like for the players on this team to play here the past couple of years.

All correct. Rick coached a decimated and distracted team to a better record than Jim did this past year. Britton Johnson? Are you kidding?

Jim's market value is not high and no foolish article regardless of how positive it might be is going to change that fact.

McKeyFan

02-01-2011, 10:08 PM

Britton Johnson? Are you kidding?

.:laugh:

DaveP63

02-02-2011, 09:18 AM

Nice article. Well reasoned and well written. I still think it's 20/20 hindsight revisionist history :bs:

Drewtone

02-02-2011, 10:22 AM

Britton Johnson? Are you kidding?

I take offense to that! ;)

Hitman02

02-02-2011, 11:42 AM

I wish there was a way we could have traded OB before he got fired. If there are really supporters of this guy out there, we could have gotten some value from him.

travmil

02-02-2011, 11:48 AM

Yeah the author is about to find out exactly how valuable JOB is. He might get an assistant job somewhere. But as far as head coaching goes, JOB is done unless he wants to go back to NCAA.

BillS

02-02-2011, 11:53 AM

First, conventional wisdom is conventional because it's usually correct. Popular sentiment is popular because it's usually correct.

:jawdrop:

brewpopps

02-02-2011, 12:00 PM

Look...tired subject , I know, but that 17-27 record that got Jim fired this season could have easily been 20-24 or better (and O'Brien would still be coaching) with a couple of coaching adjustments that were/weren't made during this season. The article even points out a couple of games that were lost because of those bad coaching decisions.
Young players and Jim O'Brien are like oil and water. If the Pacers expect to grow George, Hans, McRoberts and a couple of the others, this move was needed. Now. No apology needed.

pig norton

02-02-2011, 12:11 PM

Yeah the author is about to find out exactly how valuable JOB is. He might get an assistant job somewhere. But as far as head coaching goes, JOB is done unless he wants to go back to NCAA.

Maybe it's the fact that I liked Jim O'Brien as a coach, but I have a feeling you're wrong. He is 2-1 at taking teams to the playoffs, after all.

travmil

02-02-2011, 12:16 PM

Name one coach in the NBA right now over which JOB would be a clear upgrade. Name me one coach where the GM is saying man, now that JOB is available, I can finally fire my guy and go after him.

pacer4ever

02-02-2011, 12:28 PM

Name one coach in the NBA right now over which JOB would be a clear upgrade. Name me one coach where the GM is saying man, now that JOB is available, I can finally fire my guy and go after him.

him and John Kuster are about = everyone eles is better

pacergod2

02-02-2011, 12:42 PM

Jim O'Brien would be an exemplary head assistant in the NBA.

I just really disliked his player and in-game management. Other than those two things, which is the biggest thing that people see, O'Brien is a terrific coach. Great knowledge. Great teacher. A bit of a stubborn *******, but what good coach isn't? You take those things away from Jim and he becomes a head assistant.

Hicks

02-02-2011, 12:52 PM

The test, to me, is to see if Jim has a head coaching job by the start of the 2012-2013 season. It's not unusual for head coaches to take a year off (Rick did after we fired him, Mike Brown is off right now), but after that I would imagine he'd come back in if he could.

I'll note that he 'failed' this test after he was fired by the 76ers. He coached there in 04-05, and sat out 05-06 and 06-07.

PR07

02-02-2011, 01:01 PM

I'd be surprised if O'Brien comes back as a head coach. Wasn't he already talking about retirement when the Pacers contacted him for their coaching opening? That, and the fact that there shouldn't be too much interest given the lack of success he had at his last two stops.

Unclebuck

02-02-2011, 01:06 PM

The test, to me, is to see if Jim has a head coaching job by the start of the 2012-2013 season. It's not unusual for head coaches to take a year off (Rick did after we fired him, Mike Brown is off right now), but after that I would imagine he'd come back in if he could.

I'll note that he 'failed' this test after he was fired by the 76ers. He coached there in 04-05, and sat out 05-06 and 06-07.

Wouldn't we have to know if he had any opportunities

Unclebuck

02-02-2011, 01:08 PM

Name one coach in the NBA right now over which JOB would be a clear upgrade. Name me one coach where the GM is saying man, now that JOB is available, I can finally fire my guy and go after him.

there is about 10. IMO Jim wasn't fired because he is a 'terible coach" but because his time with this group was time to end. Sort of similar to the reason why Larry brown only lasts so long

Hicks

02-02-2011, 01:10 PM

Wouldn't we have to know if he had any opportunities

Aren't there always? What coaches do we sit around thinking 'Gee, he'd definitely be in the league if there was room'?

travmil

02-02-2011, 01:14 PM

there is about 10. IMO Jim wasn't fired because he is a 'terible coach" but because his time with this group was time to end. Sort of similar to the reason why Larry brown only lasts so long

I guess we'll see. If you're right, at least one of those 10 will be fired and JOB will be contacted to replace him.

BlueNGold

02-02-2011, 01:50 PM

there is about 10. IMO Jim wasn't fired because he is a 'terible coach" but because his time with this group was time to end. Sort of similar to the reason why Larry brown only lasts so long

I generally agree with this, but Jim's time was over before this season started.

Jim's true task in Indiana was to use his natural abilities as a disciplinarian to right the ship. You all know that Jim's father was a cop...and his brother was a marine. Right? It runs in the family folks and his coaching ability...whatever level you want to grade it...was secondary compared to his true task which was righting the ship from a culture standpoint. Jim accomplished that more than a year ago and that was about the time he should have been shipped out.

Also, Jim is not in Larry Brown's class. You may not be comparing the two, but if someone did it's a slap in the face to Brown. The market speaks to this issue and will speak again.

Speaking of...considering Jim was the SECOND choice to lead a decimated team about to rebuild...and he'd been out of a head coaching job for awhile, his stock wasn't that high when the Pacers picked him up. Otherwise, he would have a job like a hot commodity like Rick Carlisle. Instead, Jim was brought in because he's a displinarian and this team needed one.

So, is he a terrible coach? I don't think so. Did he make a number of very bad personnel and communication decisions in Indiana. Sure he did. That's why he was fired mid-season. If he wasn't doing that, he'd have coached out his contract.

McKeyFan

02-02-2011, 02:01 PM

So, is he a terrible coach? I don't think so. Did he make a number of very bad personnel and communication decisions in Indiana. Sure he did. That's why he was fired mid-season. If he wasn't doing that, he'd have coached out his contract.
I thanked your good post about Jim being the disciplinarian we needed.

But this last paragraph I can't really thank. His huge blind spot regarding personnel can't be an offhand thing. It's pretty crucial to coaching. Thus, he is pretty close to terrible.

BlueNGold

02-02-2011, 02:10 PM

I thanked your good post about Jim being the disciplinarian we needed.

But this last paragraph I can't really thank. His huge blind spot regarding personnel can't be an offhand thing. It's pretty crucial to coaching. Thus, he is pretty close to terrible.

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt I suppose. He did have some success in Boston but if you look at the context you can see it was a perfect storm for his rigid system. He had just the right mix of players to make that thing work.

Also, once he got by the mismanagement of Zeke and the Pacers, Jim was swept the next series...and not by the eventual champion. Looks good on Jim's resume' until you dig a bit deeper.

His strategy is not the type that leads to much success in the playoffs. It's a strategy more like Dallas and Phoenix over the years that had spectacular talent but flawed strategies because they always pushed the pace like Jim. Helter skelter doesn't work against the champions, even if you have an incredible PG like Steve Nash.

TooBigNdaPaint

02-02-2011, 02:14 PM

I gave O'Brien chance after chance to win me over, but as this season continued I had absolutely no hope that he was the right guy for the team. Yes there were injuries, but when the players tune you out, you obviously aren't the right guy anymore. Hearing some of the players' comments during the postgame (George and Hansbrough specifically) made me think they weren't too sad to see him go. He would not make good adjustments on the fly and took out players in the wrong situations. Yes, it's not all O'Brien's fault, but not having him here gives us a better chance to win than with him here. While I don't wish anyone to lose their job, he had to go. If you think he should've stayed, I'm sorry, but you don't know basketball.

Agree 100%.....and, let's hope LB brings Lance Stephenson back to play a few minutes a game while Brandon Rush is out injured. I'd think he'd know the offensive and defensive schemes by now (unless the reason he's being kept out is due to his 'legal troubles' that are not yet fully resolved).

travmil

02-02-2011, 02:17 PM

I've said before, part of a coaches job is to be flexible. To understand when and when not to do things in relation to the game and players. To recognize what is and isn't working and adjust accordingly. If you are not flexible, either through stubbornness or lack of ability, you need two things. The first is good healthy players that run "your" system to perfection. Until this season JOB didn't have the healthy players. Not that it mattered because he already proved many time over his complete inability or unwillingness to adjust his ways to the reality of the players he had available. McKeyFan is correct. The second thing you need is enough past success to justify your inflexible nature. He did make the playoffs previously, but he didn't do anything that countless other coaches before him hadn't done. So, JOB was running "his" system even to his own detriment. That's one last poor decision among many, and ultimately it's the one that cost him his job.

CableKC

02-02-2011, 02:59 PM

That was to long for me. Who was the author?
I thought that the author was either you or UB ;)

naptownmenace

02-02-2011, 03:51 PM

Kegboy, it gets even worse IMO because of this one..
So this guy supported firing Rick because JO, Tins, Harrison, Harrington....and who else, quit on him. Talk about backing the wrong horse.

No one thought Danny quit on him, Jackson loved the dude and that's been proven by examples many times over, and Dun/Troy just freaking got here.

What players quit on Rick but were reached by JOB, were turned around by JOB. What players did JOB get to play that Rick couldn't reach? Again, Dun and Troy at mid-season can't quit on a coach they just met with almost no practices even.

Anyone who says "I supported firing a guy who surprised the league TWICE by taking teams well beyond expectations and each to an ECF because Tinsley, JO, Harrington and Ron didn't love him" is a nitwit, there's just no two ways about that. Those dudes, right down the line, are coach killers. None have gone on to save the NBA world or prove much worth beyond a team role filler or empty stat loader (Al). Ron had to freaking salvage his horrible season with a couple of playoff miracles in order to regain some kind of respect as a player.

I'd rather have the coach that took Ron to the all-star game and got him a DPOY award and took a disaster to round 2 and has Dirk ripping through one of his finest seasons along with a list of "didn't you used to be great" players.

Sheesh. It would be different if Rick had been terrible before or was bombing in Dallas. Winning 50 games with 3 different teams in 10 years is how you go on to be Larry Brown, Lenny Wilkins, Sloan, Jackson, etc.

That was so good, I almost want to print it, slap it in a frame and put it on the wall.

Well done, Seth!

Hoop

02-02-2011, 08:13 PM

I hear the Siberian Winter League has an opening for an assistant video editor.

Naptown_Seth

02-02-2011, 08:44 PM

First, conventional wisdom is conventional because it's usually correct. Popular sentiment is popular because it's usually correct.

Beyond that gambling is a great example of crowds having a true sense of things when you look at how evenly distributed the results against the spread are, or how close the payouts of paramutual betting are to the odds the crowd sets.

And he said "USUALLY". Of course the groundbreakers that changed conventional thought are well known. That's because it's UNUSUAL.

Not so well known, every freaking crackpot who went against conventional wisdom and was really, really wrong. You know, like any dude that thought he could fly by flapping his arms as he jumped off a building.

PEER REVIEW is how science freaking functions for chrissake. This is why COLD FUSION was roundly debunked, and rightfully so. Good thinkers are OPEN to new ideas, but they also understand that established ideas that have been scrutinized time and again might just have some real merit. The book on JOB as a bad coach grew over more than 3 seasons, not to mention prior results and comments from his previous jobs.

JOB wasn't slammed by 2 nuts. First off he actually had a bad W-L record which is the job. Second he actually was pretty awful at distributing playing time to players this team will be relying upon next season. Third HIS PEERS in recent seasons have joked about his coaching style, and this includes guys like Phil Jackson.

When the crowd gets that big and the facts all line up behind it then it takes an epic, groundbreaking set of proof to overcome that, not just the "unconventional viewpoints" of 6 guys on the internet. This doesn't mean the crowd is always right, just usually. And when they aren't it takes A LOT of evidence to the contrary to enact a paradigm shift.

Or in short, you can enjoy forcing crow down our throat the day JOB leads some team against the odds to great results. But until then the idea that JOB was doing a pretty good job is going to remain the unconventional and totally unproven thought.

N'menace - appreciate your appreciation...of course my opinions were formed by the crowd, by the interaction of thoughts and discussion, and I don't even mean that as a sarcastic extra dig for this thread. Just saying it's not surprising it doesn't resonate at least a little since similar stuff has been said by many of us.

BlueNGold

02-02-2011, 11:05 PM

The academics amuse me. Why they continue to attempt to prove that 1+1 = 3 is beyond me. I just know it's wrong by looking at it. In any event, Jim is that type based on his bio. His brother apparently could have warned us:

His favorite courses at the Jesuit institution were philosophy and theology."As my brother Barry once told me, ‘Your problem is you think about eight shades too deeply,’ " O’Brien said after a recent training camp practice as he readied for his second year with the Pacers.“I like to think. What philosophy does is force you to think and give your viewpoints on any number of things in the world. With theology, the Jesuits . . . they force you to understand all religions. Whenever you’re thinking about theology, it can be a very challenging thought process.”

This explains a bit why certain people on this board think like Jim...while others do not.

BTW, it's not like BnG is uneducated with 8.5 years of college...I just don't think success in the real world is a matter a PhD can necessarily figure out. In fact, I think they come in handicapped...and I have a lot of real world experience seeing that.

Based on my 20+ years as a business owner and corporate employee, my conclusion is that many (not all) highly intelligent people do some of the dumbest things. Especially the engineers and computer scientists. For example, I know a Mensa who writes some of the worst software I've ever seen because he has zero...no make that negative common sense. The software is an amazing invention in some cases, but is often either entirely unnecessary or not wanted by the customer. This dude is paid 120/hr and counting his cut from his employees he probably pulls in 500K/yr. I suppose he's doing well...but his software and decision-making is still horrible. The Director in charge of the department always says "but he's a Mensa". The rest of us just shake our heads.

Kind of reminds me of Jim O'Brien and all the stat-fan-boys. Really smart and really wrong.

RWB

02-03-2011, 03:47 PM

BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of friction?

Brad8888

02-03-2011, 04:36 PM

BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of sliding friction during that transitional phase during which the vector of their moment of inertia ceases to be parallel to the surface and instead becomes perpendicular to it while at the same time their physical bodies experience the exact opposite orientational relationship to the same surface?

Fixed? :D

Brad8888

02-03-2011, 04:43 PM

there is about 10. IMO Jim wasn't fired because he is a 'terible coach" but because his time with this group was time to end. Sort of similar to the reason why Larry brown only lasts so long

Who do you think those 10 (or even 5) are, just out of curiosity?

Unclebuck

02-03-2011, 05:15 PM

Who do you think those 10 (or even 5) are, just out of curiosity?

I did this right before the season started I think. broke the coaches into 4 categories. quickly and off the top of my head.

The elite:
Skiles
Phil Jackson
Larry brown
Popovich
Sloan

The next group of very good coaches.
Doc Rivers - although I think I would move him up to the elite.
Nate MacMilan
Scot Brooks
SVG
Spoelstra
Adelman

Then the average to slightly above average group which included Jim O'/Brien. I would not want to have any of these guys replace Jim.
Avery Johnson
Doug Collins
Mike D'Antoni
Gentry
Vinny Del Negro
Karl
Hollins

Then the worst of the current NBA coaches. I think I had 8 or so in here only 5 right now. .
Flip Saunders
Westphal
Rambis
Triano
Kuster

keep in mind several are first year coaches, so I did not know. Although I will say now that Monty Williams has done a great job, I would give him an A. Larry Drew has done a nice job give him a B. Tom Thibbodeau, i would give him an A+ would love to have him as our coach. Keith Smart is OK.

I would put Mike Brown in the very good category. Mike Woodson i would put him in the same category as O'brien

BringJackBack

02-03-2011, 05:20 PM

UB will you admit though that Obie was a really bad fit for our roster?

Since86

02-03-2011, 05:23 PM

What about Rick?

DaveP63

02-03-2011, 06:14 PM

BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of friction?

That is the difference between being a theoretical engineer and a practical engineer :D

BlueNGold

02-03-2011, 10:02 PM

BnG, very classic, thanks for the laugh. So you're saying someone with common sense can walk outside and determine it is slick while others need to discuss coefficient of friction?

Two men had their cars parked under the Artsgarden yesterday morning. One was named Jim the other Frank.

At 9AM, Frank looked outside and saw chunks of ice melting on the windows and watched a few fall harmlessly on the street. By 9:15AM he had his car moved down the street to a place safe from the falling ice.

Earlier that morning at 8AM, Jim looked outside and saw chunks of ice melting on the windows and watched a few fall harmlessly on the street. Jim pondered this for awhile and logged into his premium account with weather.com. He checked his thermometer, barometer, hygrometer and anemometer. After 3 hours of collecting and analyzing the data with a few SAS macros, he decided it was time to move his car before a chunk of ice falls on it.

Of course, you know the rest of the story. Frank caught the game last night. In fact, he had a really good seat.

Jim, however, is now in intensive care at Methodist...;)

Unclebuck

02-04-2011, 09:22 AM

What about Rick?

oops, told you I did the list really quick, forgot about him.

I'd put him in the second group - very good coaches.

Unclebuck

02-04-2011, 09:23 AM

UB will you admit though that Obie was a really bad fit for our roster?

Do you mean from a personality standpoint. Or more from a system standpoint?

BringJackBack

02-04-2011, 09:24 AM

Do you mean from a personality standpoint. Or more from a system standpoint?

I mean from a system standpoint, but probably both personality and system-wise they don't fix in my opinion.

pacer4ever

02-04-2011, 03:50 PM

I did this right before the season started I think. broke the coaches into 4 categories. quickly and off the top of my head.

The elite:
Skiles
Phil Jackson
Rick Carlie
Larry brown
Popovich
Sloan

The next group of very good coaches.
Doc Rivers - although I think I would move him up to the elite.
Nate MacMilan
Scot Brooks
SVG
Spoelstra
Adelman

Then the average to slightly above average group which included Jim O'/Brien. I would not want to have any of these guys replace Jim.
Avery Johnson
Doug Collins
Mike D'Antoni
Gentry
Vinny Del Negro
Karl
Hollins

Then the worst of the current NBA coaches. I think I had 8 or so in here only 5 right now. .
Flip Saunders
Westphal
Rambis
Triano
JOB
Kuster

keep in mind several are first year coaches, so I did not know. Although I will say now that Monty Williams has done a great job, I would give him an A. Larry Drew has done a nice job give him a B. Tom Thibbodeau, i would give him an A+ would love to have him as our coach. Keith Smart is OK.

I would put Mike Brown in the very good category. Mike Woodson i would put him in the same category as O'brien